Steel

In Laymen's terms, can someone explain the difference in types of steel? 531, 953 etc. What are the differences and how do they affect the feel?

Thanks

Steel

• 453 - Manganese/Titanium alloy. Reynolds produced only the 3 main tubes in this alloy and they were single butted.
  
• 501 - Reynolds 501 was a chromium-molybdenum (CrMo) steel, seamed, butted tubeset that made its debut about 1983 and was available in two different thicknesses.
  
• 525 - Cold worked Chromoly. UTS: 700-900 MPa, density 7.78gm/cc
  

• 531 - Managanese/Molybdenum. UTS: 48 - 58 Tsi, 100 - 130 Ksi, 700 - 900 MPa

• 531SC - Limited edition tubeset used by Trek in 1984

• 531C - Competition Racing tubeset

• 531ST - Special Touring tubeset[3]

• 531OS - Oversize tubeset

• 631 - Seamless air-hardened heat-treated. UTS: 800-900 MPa, density 7.78 gm/cc

• 631OS - Oversize tubeset

• 653 - Following feedback from Eddy Merckx that a pure 753 frame was too harsh for certain stages of the Tour de France, Reynolds produced a 653 tubeset which combined 753 stays with 531 main tubes and forks. The 531 used was a thinner gauge than usual produced specifically for use in the 653 set. Eddy and other riders were very pleased with the result, which combined a light, ultra-stiff and efficient transmission with a more forgiving and comfy ride.

• 653 Record - Needs information

• 708 Classic - 708 was a tube set in Reynolds' range in the 80's, supposedly designed for track frames. It has 531 main tubes. These were not butted, but had 8 flats running along the length of the tube. The rear stays would be 753.

• 725 - Heat-Treated Chromoly. UTS: 1080-1280 MPa, density 7.78gm/cc

• 725OS - Oversize tubeset

• 731 - Needs information

• 731OS - Oversize tubeset

• 753 - Heat-Treated Manganese/Molybdenum. Essentially 531 made with reduced wall thickness and heat treated to increase tensile strength. UTS: 1080 - 1280 MPa, 70 - 83 Tsi, 157 - 186 Ksi

• 753OS - Oversize tubeset

• 853 - Seamless air-hardening heat-treated. UTS: 1250-1400 MPa, density 7.78 gm/cc

• 853OS - Oversize tubeset

• 953 - Maraging stainless steel. UTS: 1750-2050 MPa, density 7.8 gm/cc

Fuck me! that was FAST!!!

Yeah and that is just Reynolds...

Courtesy of Hippy
http://strongframes.com/material_tech/specs/

from this thread...
http://www.londonfgss.com/thread11950.html

crap. where did the term vintage lightweights came from. 531 is awesome tubing, my old holdsworth mistral from the 60's, was feather light even with chromed ends.

531 is double-butted (thick tubing at ends and thinner in the middle). if you tap your nail alongthe tubing it will change sounds in the middle, more tinnier.

"whoop, there it is!"

and some info on columbus

http://equusbicycle.com/bike/columbus/columbuschart.htm

I saw this bike, the Cannondale Capo.
It has an aluminium frame and carbon fork.
Is this bike suitable for some freestyle kind of riding?

Not with a carbon fork.

But the aluminium frame is freestylable?

Is it possible to have a (albeit opinionated) breakdown on the pro's and con's of some of the more popular tubings?? It would be sweet to get an idea of what's what...

In ride comfort/ preformance terms I mean

But the aluminium frame is freestylable?

jezuzchrist...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xe6KqdJndcU

531 is awesome. This is all you need to know.
Allegedly.

But the aluminium frame is freestylable?

Try asking here -
http://www.londonfgss.com/thread7272-40.html#post539226
or
http://www.londonfgss.com/thread16129-3.html

531 is awesome. This is all you need to know.
Allegedly.

I've got the t-shirt to prove it.

I've got the t-shirt to prove it.

Is it possible to have a (albeit opinionated) breakdown on the pro's and con's of some of the more popular tubings?? It would be sweet to get an idea of what's what...

That's brilliant! lol
So, am I right that the higher the number the newer the technique and generally thinner/stronger the steel?

501 made its debut in 1983, you sure?

jezuzchrist...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xe6KqdJndcU

nice find :{)
made me laugh at least for 45s :{)
IMO it is product placement ad....

Not with a carbon fork.

Why?

Cross bikes have carbon forks, as do many rigid singlespeed MTBs. (Pace, White Brothers etc,.) I would think carbon would be well up to the job for the type of relatively lame 'freestyle' being done on fixed gear bikes.

So, am I right that the higher the number the newer the technique and generally thinner/stronger the steel?

That is not bad for a rough guide although not strictly true. For example I don't think 631 is any better than 531 other than it can be TIG welded (or something like that)

631 is a bit stronger than 531, but yeah, mainly the difference is TIGability as I understand it. My Dave Yates course bike is made of it and is stunningly comfy and not notably bendy (YMMV if you're Mark Cavendish or something).

http://www.reynoldstechnology.biz/downloads/materialcompweb.pdf has some pretty graphs of comparative properties of Reynolds toobs.

Why?

Cross bikes have carbon forks, as do many rigid singlespeed MTBs. (Pace, White Brothers etc,.) I would think carbon would be well up to the job for the type of relatively lame 'freestyle' being done on fixed gear bikes.

O rly?

http://vimeo.com/2489092

There's lots of tubing and frame info at these 2 sites
http://www.vintage-trek.com/refurbish.htm
http://www.desperadocycles.com/The_Lowdown_On_Tubing/About_Steel_Tubing_frameset.htm

O rly?

http://vimeo.com/2489092

Can't see that as I am at work but no doubt it is showing somone who is actually doing something not so lame (very much in the minority)

I suppose the question is does Kameradsky do that sort of stuff. If not then will be fine. I never exactly took it easy on my singlespeed bikes with carbon forks!

Edit - Oh, just watched the clip. So it was actually someone doing something lame after all. I see the alloy part of the fork broke there, carbon bit was still alright :-)

Why?

Cross bikes have carbon forks, as do many rigid singlespeed MTBs. (Pace, White Brothers etc,.) I would think carbon would be well up to the job for the type of relatively lame 'freestyle' being done on fixed gear bikes.

Those forks were also designed for their intended purpose. In conclusion you maybe right though for lame freestylin on a fixed.